THE IDENTITY (RE)CONSTRUCTION OF NONNATIVE ENGLISH TEACHERS STEPPING INTO NATIVE TURKISH TEACHERS’ SHOES
A MASTER’S THESIS
BY
SEVCAN MUTLU
THE PROGRAM OF
TEACHING ENGLISH AS A FOREIGN LANGUAGE İHSAN DOĞRAMACI BILKENT UNIVERSITY
ANKARA
THE IDENTITY (RE)CONSTRUCTION OF NONNATIVE ENGLISH TEACHERS STEPPING INTO NATIVE TURKISH TEACHERS’ SHOES
The Graduate School of Education of
İhsan Doğramacı Bilkent University
by
Sevcan Mutlu
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts
in
The Program of Teaching English as a Foreign Language İhsan Doğramacı Bilkent University
Ankara
İHSAN DOĞRAMACI BILKENT UNIVERSITY GRADUATE SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
THE IDENTITY (RE)CONSTRUCTION OF NONNATIVE ENGLISH TEACHERS STEPPING INTO NATIVE TURKISH TEACHERS’ SHOES
SEVCAN MUTLU May 2015
I certify that I have read this thesis and have found that it is fully adequate, in scope and in quality, as a thesis for the degree of Master of Arts in Teaching English as a Foreign Language.
---
Asst. Prof. Dr. Deniz Ortaçtepe (Supervisor)
I certify that I have read this thesis and have found that it is fully adequate, in scope and in quality, as a thesis for the degree of Master of Arts in Teaching English as a Foreign Language.
--- Prof. Dr. Kimberly Trimble (Examining Committee Member)
I certify that I have read this thesis and have found that it is fully adequate, in scope and in quality, as a thesis for the degree of Master of Arts in Teaching English as a Foreign Language.
--- Asst. Prof. Dr. Patrick Hart (Examining Committee Member)
Approval of the Graduate School of Education
--- Prof. Dr. Margaret K. Sands (Director)
ABSTRACT
THE IDENTITY (RE)CONSTRUCTION OF NONNATIVE ENGLISH TEACHERS STEPPING INTO NATIVE TURKISH TEACHERS’ SHOES
Sevcan Mutlu
M.A. Program of Teaching English as a Foreign Language Supervisor: Asst. Prof. Dr. Deniz Ortaçtepe
June 2015
This study aimed to investigate how the changing role from a nonnative English teacher to a native Turkish teacher affects teachers’ identity construction in terms of self-image, self-efficacy, and beliefs about teaching and learning. In this respect, the study explored the experiences of five nonnative English teachers who went to the USA on a prestigious scholarship for one year to teach their native language, Turkish, as native teachers. The data were collected mainly through three different instruments: a personal data questionnaire, ongoing controlled journals along with follow-up questions, and interviews. All the qualitative data were
analyzed according to Boyatzis’ (1998) thematic analysis. Initially, each participant’s data were examined on paper copies to discover the themes that naturally emerged. After that, the emerging themes in the initial analysis were color-coded and related to three sensitizing concepts, which were a) self-image b) self-efficacy c) beliefs about teaching and learning.
The findings of this study revealed that a) being a native teacher contributed to the participants’ self-images, b) being trained in ELT and being experienced in teaching English were more influential in the participants’ perceptions of their
teaching abilities, c) being a native speaker and knowing a language were not enough to be able to teach a language, d) knowing how to teach a language could also
facilitate teaching another language, and e) students, colleagues, and the socialization process had effect on teachers’ identity. The changes in their self-image, self-efficacy and beliefs about teaching and learning indicated the identity reconstruction of
nonnative English teachers who shifted their roles to native Turkish teachers.
Considering these results, this study supported the existing literature in that a) teacher identity is multiple and has a shifting nature, and b) teacher identity is in conflict and flux. It was also concluded that the way the participants were raised as English teachers shape their identities, and the participants’ identities are more rooted in English language teaching because of being trained in that.
Key words: teacher identity, self-image, self-efficacy, beliefs about teaching and learning, nonnative English speaking teachers, native Turkish teachers.
ÖZET
ANA DİLLERİ İNGİLİZCE OLMAYAN İNGİLİZCE ÖĞRETMENLERİNİN ANA DİLLERİ OLAN TÜRKÇE’Yİ ÖĞRETİRKEN KİMLİKLERİNİN YENİDEN
ŞEKİLLENMESİ
Sevcan Mutlu
Yüksek Lisans, Yabancı Dil Olarak İngilizce Öğretimi Tez Yöneticisi: Yrd. Doç. Dr. Deniz Ortaçtepe
Haziran 2015
Bu çalışma, ana dili İngilizce olmayan İngilizce öğretmenlerinin ana dilleri Türkçe’yi öğretme rolüne geçmesinin, öğretmenlerin kendilerini algılamaları, yeteneklerine bakış açıları, ve öğretme ve öğrenme ile ilgili düşünceleri açısından kimliklerini yapılandırmalarını nasıl etkilediğini araştırmayı amaçlamıştır. Bu
bağlamda bu çalışma bir burs aracılığıyla bir yıllığına Amerika’ya ana dilleri Türkçe’yi öğretmeye giden beş tane ana dilleri İngilizce olmayan İngilizce öğretmeninin
tecrübelerini incelemiştir. Veriler başlıca üç farklı yolla toplanmıştır: kişisel bilgi anketi, ek sorularla beraber düzenli olarak gönderilen günlükler ve sözlü mülakatlar. Bütün nitel bulgular Boyatzis’in (1998) tematik analizine göre çözümlenmiştir. İlk olarak, kendiliğinden ortaya çıkan temaları bulmak için her bir katılımcının verisi kağıt üzerinde incelemiştir. Sonrasında, ilk incelemeden ortaya çıkan temalar renklerle
kodlandırılmış ve üç kavramla, kendilerini algılama şekilleri, yeteneklerine bakış açıları ve öğretme ve öğrenme ile ilgili düşünceleri, eşleştirilmiştir.
Bu çalışmanın bulguları göstermiştir ki; a) ana dilini öğretmek katılımcıların kendilerini algılama şekillerine katkıda bulunmuştur, b) İngiliz Dili Öğretimi’nde eğitim almış olmak ve İngilizce öğretmede tecrübeli olmak katılımcıların öğretme yeteneklerini algılamalarında daha etkili olmuştur, c) bir dili ana dili olarak
konuşmak ve bilmek dil öğretmek için yeterli değildir, d) bir dili nasıl öğreteceğini bilmek başka bir dili öğretmeye yardımcı olabilir, ve e) öğrenciler, meslektaşlar ve sosyalleşme süreci öğretmenin kimliği üzerinde etkilidir. Kendilerini algılama şekilleri, yeteneklerine bakış açıları ve öğretme ve öğrenme ile ilgili
düşüncelerindeki değişiklikler, İngilizceyi ana dili olarak öğretmeyen öğretmenlerin Türkçe’yi ana dil olarak öğretme pozisyonuna geçtiğinde kimliklerinin yeniden şekillendiğini göstermektedir.
Bu sonuçlar göz önünde bulundurulduğunda, bu çalışma mevcut literatürü şu açılardan desteklemiştir; a) öğretmen kimliği çeşitli ve değişken bir yapıya sahiptir ve b) öğretmen kimliği kendi ile çatışma ve sürekli değişim içindedir. Aynı zamanda, İngilizce öğretmeni olarak yetiştirilme yöntemlerinin katılımcıların kimliklerini şekillendirdiği ve katılımcıların kimliklerinin eğitim aldıkları alan olan İngiliz dili öğretimine daha fazla kök saldığı sonuçlarına varılmıştır.
Anahtar Kelimeler: öğretmen kimliği, kendini algılama şekli (self-image), yeteneklerine bakış açısı (self-efficacy), öğretme ve öğrenme ile ilgili düşünceler (beliefs about teaching and learning), ana dilleri İngilizce olmayan İngilizce öğretmenleri (nonnative English speaking teachers), Türkçe’yi ana dilleri olarak öğreten öğretmenler (native Turkish teachers).
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Writing a thesis was one of the most challenging yet most fulfilling
experiences of my life. There were a number of people who provided me with their encouragement, support, and guidance during this process, so I would like to offer my regards and thanks to those individuals.
First and foremost, I would like to express my gratitude for my thesis advisor, Dr. Deniz Ortaçtepe, for her guidance, constructive feedback, patience and trust in me throughout this process. She was always there with her constant support and encouragement during the times that I gave up. Without her thought-provoking feedback, I could not have created such a piece of work. Many thanks to Dr. Kimberly Trimble for all his support. I am grateful to him for his on-going support, warmth, energy and enthusiasm to teach. I would also like to thank Dr. Patrick Hart for volunteering to be a committee member in my thesis examination and for his inspiring guidance, questions, and suggestions.
I would like to take this opportunity to thank Özlem Atalay, the director of the School of Foreign Languages, to Naz Dino, Assistant Director of the School Of Foreign Languages, and to Aliye Hale Bingöl, the Chairperson of the Department of Basic English, for giving me the permission to attend the MA TEFL program.
The participants of this study deserve my special thanks for their time and collaboration. Thanks for sharing your sincere insights and experiences with me without expecting anything in return even though you were busy with your own teaching duties and your new life in the U.S. Thank you for making this study possible.
My deepest gratitude goes to my beloved family for their unconditional love and trust in me to accomplish any journey. I am deeply grateful to my mother, father, and sister for their support. Without their love and affection, I would not have been able to complete the program.
I also thank my friends for supporting me during hard times. I knew that they were always there even when I did not have the time to meet them. I also want to thank all of my classmates in the MA TEFL program for their invaluable friendship and cooperativeness throughout the year.
And last but not least, my heart-felt gratitude goes to Ali Mahir Kaya, who was always there with his support, encouragement, and patience in almost every step of this process. He showed genuine interest in my study and learned a lot about teacher identity as I felt the need to think aloud and hear that I was on the right track. The worst part for him was dealing with my ups and downs along the process. I am so grateful to him for his endless assistance, patience, encouragement and everlasting belief in me this year. Thanks for being in my life.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT ... iii
ÖZET... v
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ... vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS ... ix
LIST OF TABLES ... xiii
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION ... 1
Introduction ... 1
Background of the Study ... 2
Statement of the Problem ... 5
Research Question ... 6
Significance of the Study ... 6
Key Terminology ... 7
Conclusion ... 7
CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW ... 8
Introduction ... 8
Identity ... 8
Teacher Identity ... 9
Defining Teacher Identity ... 10
Components of Teacher Identity ... 11
Self-image ... 12
Self-efficacy ... 13
Factors Influencing Teacher Identity ... 16
The Native-Nonnative Dichotomy ... 18
Definition of Native-Nonnative Speakers ... 18
Differences between Native and Nonnative Teachers ... 19
The Effect of Being a Native or Nonnative Teacher on Teachers’ Identity ... 21
Conclusion ... 25
CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY ... 27
Introduction ... 27
Participants and Settings ... 28
Research Design ... 31
Instruments ... 31
Personal Data Questionnaire ... 31
Controlled Journals ... 31
Follow-up Questions ... 33
Interviews... 33
Data Collection Procedures ... 35
Data Analysis ... 37
Rigor and Credibility of the Qualitative Measures ... 39
The Researcher ... 40
Conclusion ... 42
CHAPTER IV: DATA ANALYSIS ... 43
Introduction ... 43
The Profiles of the Participants ... 44
Results ... 47
The Shift in Teachers’ Identities in terms of Their Self-image ... 47
Discovering the teaching self in a new context. ... 48
Being a native Turkish teacher vs. being a nonnative English teacher. ... 51
The role of socialization. ... 53
The effect of students’ and colleagues’ perceptions. ... 56
The Shift in Teachers’ Identities in terms of Their Self-efficacy ... 60
Perception of teaching abilities. ... 60
A nonnative English language teacher in Turkey... 60
A native Turkish teacher in the U.S. ... 63
The advantages and challenges of teaching Turkish in the States. ... 68
Students’ motivation and success. ... 72
Students’ and colleagues’ perceptions... 74
Perception of language abilities. ... 76
The Shift in Teachers’ Identities in terms of Their Beliefs about Teaching and Learning ... 81
Beliefs about teaching. ... 81
The role of culture in class. ... 81
The use of target language. ... 82
Teaching Turkish vs. teaching English. ... 83
Being a native speaker vs. being trained in teaching... 85
Methods and techniques. ... 87
To prepare the syllabus and quizzes or not. ... 88
Daily life experiences. ... 89
Beliefs about learning. ... 90
Students’ motivation. ... 90
How students learn. ... 92
CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION ... 95
Introduction ... 95
Findings and Discussion ... 96
The Shift in Teachers’ Identities in terms of Their Self-image ... 96
The Shift in Teachers’ Identities in terms of Their Self-efficacy ... 99
The Shift in Teachers’ Identities in terms of Their Beliefs about Teaching and Learning ... 104
Overall Findings: The Role of Self-image, Efficacy and Beliefs on Identity... 109
Pedagogical Implications of the Study ... 112
Limitations of the Study ... 113
Suggestions for Further Research ... 115
Conclusion ... 115
REFERENCES ... 117
APPENDICES ... 124
Appendix A: Personal Data Questionnaire ... 124
Appendix B: Controlled Journals ... 126
Appendix C: Holiday Journal ... 127
Appendix D: Questionnaire for the First Interview ... 128
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1. Demographic Information about the Participants ... 29 2. The Duration of Interviews ... 35
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION Introduction
Teacher identity has been the focus of many studies that attempted to define the concept itself and its components (e.g., Akkerman & Meijer, 2011; Beauchamp & Thomas, 2009; Beijaard, Meijer, & Verloop, 2004; Varghese, Morgan, Johnston, & Johnson, 2005). Beijaard, Verloop and Vermunt (2000) define teacher identity as how teachers see themselves as teachers. Many researchers have expanded upon this simple definition, suggesting alternative definitions and features of teacher identity (e.g., Akkerman & Meijer, 2011; Beauchamp & Thomas, 2009; Duru, 2006).
Its complexity as a concept has led researchers to investigate factors affecting teacher identity, and among those factors the native and nonnative dichotomy has received great attention. A number of studies have explored the influence of being a nonnative English speaking teacher on teacher identity construction (e.g., Huang, 2014; H. Kim, 2011; Park, 2012; Pavlenko, 2003) while fewer studies have
investigated native teachers’ identities (e.g., Juhász, 2011; Wong, 2009). There are also cases in which teachers need to shift roles from being a nonnative teacher to a native teacher. Through some exchange programs, nonnative English teachers in many countries, including Turkey, often end up teaching their native tongue in English-speaking countries. However, the literature has failed to look at the effect of this change from being a nonnative teacher to a native teacher on the teacher’s
identity. Considering this gap in the literature, this case study aims to investigate how the shift from the role of a nonnative English teacher to a native Turkish teacher affects teachers’ identity construction.
Background of the Study
Teacher identity is an emerging research area that has attracted attention in many studies recently. As Varghese, Morgan, Johnston and Johnson (2005) put it,
In order to understand language teaching and learning we need to understand teachers; and in order to understand teachers, we need to have a clearer sense of who they are: the professional, cultural, political, and individual identities which they claim or which are assigned to them. (p. 22)
In accordance with what Varghese et al. (2005) claim regarding the role of the teacher in the language teaching and learning processes, many researchers have started to explore the concept of teacher identity (e.g., Akkerman & Meijer, 2011; Beauchamp & Thomas, 2009; Duru, 2006). However, it has not been easy to reach a full understanding of the concept due to its dynamic nature. Akkerman and Meijer (2011) clarify this changing state of teacher identity by discussing that teacher
identity involves different parts and identities that try to make the self a whole person and that continuously shift under different contexts. This view highlights the
importance of analyzing the different components of teacher identity and the factors that reshape teacher identity.
In order to define and understand the concept of teacher identity, many researchers have examined the components that constitute it (e.g., Bandura, 1995; Bukor, 2012; Knowles, 1992; Olsen, 2008; Williams & Burden, 1997). Self-image, self-efficacy and teachers’ beliefs about teaching and learning are some of the
components that have been studied in regard to teacher identity (e.g., Bandura, 1997; Deghaidy, 2006; Kelchtermans, 1993; Knowles, 1992; Williams & Burden, 1997).
Kelchtermans (1993) identifies self-image as one of the components of
teacher identity and defines it as the way teachers describe themselves. In this regard, Deghaidy (2006) has studied the effect of self-image on science teachers and
concluded that teachers’ images of the self affect their confidence, teaching behavior in class and the effectiveness of the lesson. However, there has been little attention to teachers’ self-images within the field of language teaching.
The second concept that can be acknowledged as a component of teacher identity is self-efficacy, which has been defined by Bandura (1995) as “beliefs in one’s capabilities to organize and execute the courses of action required to manage prospective situations” (p. 2). As to the importance of self-efficacy, Bandura (1995) states that the sense of efficacy influences teachers’ dedication to teaching and their ability to deal with academic problems, along with stress levels caused by these problems.
Williams and Burden (1997) outline a third component of teacher identity. In their study, they claim that teachers’ beliefs about themselves, learners, and teaching and learning processes are influential in determining teachers’ classroom practices and identities. Similarly, Bukor (2012) underlines the importance of teachers’ beliefs and assumptions about the teaching and learning processes in determining their perceptions of themselves as teachers. As these studies suggest, image, self-efficacy and teachers’ beliefs about teaching and learning are critical components of teacher identity.
There are many factors affecting a teacher’s self-image, self-efficacy and beliefs about teaching and learning. Olsen (2008) identifies prior personal and professional experience, teacher education experience, current teaching context and career plans as some of the factors that are influential in the process of teachers’ ongoing identity construction. In his book, Olsen (2010) further analyzes teacher identity and lists upbringing, beliefs, opinions, friends, and media as some other factors affecting identity. Moreover, the school environment, learners, colleagues and school administrators can shape teacher identity (Beauchamp & Thomas, 2009; Duru
2006). More specifically, as teachers meet different types of students, interact with their colleagues and administrators within a variety of educational contexts and participate in teacher education programs, their identities are shaped and reshaped (Beauchamp & Thomas, 2009).
One factor that may affect a teacher’s identity is being a native or a nonnative teacher. The literature has provided different definitions of a native and a nonnative speaker (e.g., Braine, 2010; Davies, 2003; Medgyes, 2001). Exposure to a language and learning it from birth are the key terms that Murray and Christison (2011) use to identify a native speaker. A native speaker of English has been defined as “someone who speaks English as his or her native language, also called mother tongue, first language, or L1” (Medgyes, 2001, p. 430) and as someone who has the intuitive knowledge about what is accurate and what is not in his or her language (Davies, 2003). In contrast, a nonnative speaker can be defined as a person who learns a language “as a second or foreign language” (Braine, 2010, p. 9).
The pedagogical advantages of both native and nonnative language teachers have attracted a great deal of attention in the literature (e.g., Medgyes, 1992; Phillipson, 1992). There have also been studies looking at students’ and
administrators’ attitudes towards native English speaking teachers (NEST) and nonnative English speaking teachers (NNEST) (e.g., Braine, 2010; Chen, 2010; Huang, 2014; Selvi, 2010). Recently some studies have focused on identities and self-perceptions of NESTs and NNESTs. For example, Park (2012) presents one East Asian woman’s experiences before and during her time teaching English to speakers of other languages in the United States. In that study, Park (2012) analyzes different events in that woman’s life to show how her experiences affect her identity as a learner and a teacher. Similarly, Ortaçtepe (2015) explores the identity
pursue their graduate degrees by examining their language socialization experiences. In a different study, Juhász (2011) looks at native teachers’ identities and explores 18 native English speaking teachers’ experiences in a foreign language classroom to investigate their perceptions of their own strengths and weaknesses and their perceptions of the differences between NESTs and NNESTs.
Statement of the Problem
A considerable amount of research has been conducted on multiple identities that teachers take on (e.g., Beauchamp & Thomas, 2009; Varghese et al., 2005). Moreover, some studies have explored the developmental processes of teacher identity construction (e.g., Izadinia, 2013) and factors affecting teacher identity (e.g., Beauchamp & Thomas, 2009; Duru, 2006; Gur, 2013; Olsen, 2010. Among the factors affecting teacher identity, the distinction between native English speaking teachers (NEST) and nonnative English speaking teachers (NNEST) has attracted a great deal of interest (e.g., Medgyes, 1992). Most of the studies in this regard have examined identity construction of NNESTs by observing their experiences in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) and English as a Second Language (ESL) contexts or in English-speaking countries (e.g., Huang, 2014; H. Kim, 2011; Park, 2012; Pavlenko, 2003). Fewer studies have been conducted on the identity construction of native English teachers during their experiences in EFL or ESL settings (e.g., Juhász, 2011). There are, however, cases in which nonnative English teachers teach their native tongues in English-speaking countries, and the literature does not provide information about the identity reconstruction of these teachers.
An international educational exchange program sponsored by the U.S. government gives teachers in different countries the opportunity to go to the USA to teach their native language. Turkey is one of the countries from which English teachers can apply for this program. When English teachers from Turkey receive
scholarship through this program, they go to the USA to teach their native language, Turkish, for one year in a university setting. As a result, these teachers switch their role from nonnative English speaking teachers in Turkey to Turkish teachers in the USA, and go through a process during which they may reconstruct their identities as native speaker teachers. In this respect, there is a study conducted by Ortaçtepe (2015) exploring the identity negotiation of two nonnative-English-speaking teachers who worked in Turkey, and then went to the United States to pursue their graduate degrees. However, there is no study examining how changing roles from a nonnative English teacher to a native Turkish teacher affects teachers’ identity construction in terms of self-image, self-efficacy, and teachers’ beliefs about teaching and learning.
Research Question
How does the changing role from a nonnative L2 teacher to a native L1 teacher affect Turkish EFL teachers’ identity (re)construction in terms of
1. self-image? 2. self-efficacy?
3. beliefs about teaching and learning?
In the present study, the word (re)construction is used to describe the participants’ experiences since identity is not fixed, but it is multiple and shifting as discussed in the literature (e.g., Akkerman & Meijer, 2011; Beijaard et al., 2004; Peirce, 1995; Varghese et al., 2005). Therefore, it is assumed that the participants in this study are in the continuous process of (re)constructing their identities.
Significance of the Study
Studies conducted on teacher identity construction of NESTs and NNESTs have looked at the issue either from NESTs’ or NNESTs’ perspective (e.g., Braine, 2010; Huang, 2014; H. Kim, 2011; Medgyes, 1992; Park, 2012; Pavlenko, 2003). However, these studies failed to consider the transformation from NNESTs to
NESTs. In this sense, there is no research on nonnative English teachers stepping into native Turkish teachers’ shoes and the effect of this journey on their identity
construction. Therefore, this case study intends to explore the experiences of five nonnative English teachers who go to the USA on a prestigious scholarship for one year to teach their native language, Turkish, as native teachers. Observing the processes these teachers go through, this case study aims to examine their identity (re)construction in terms of their self-image, self-efficacy, and beliefs about teaching and learning.
This case study may contribute to the previous studies on teacher identity and to the discussion on NESTs and NNESTs by offering insight into how the shift from the role of a nonnative English teacher to a native Turkish teacher affects the identity of teachers. The study might also benefit the future teaching practices in language teaching and learning. Moreover, this study might be significant for the teachers who will receive scholarship through this program in that it will provide information on the challenges and identity conflicts they might encounter, and for the coordinators of the program as to how to help these teachers throughout this process.
Key Terminology
The following key terms are used throughout the present study: NESTs: Native English speaking teachers.
NNESTs: Nonnative English speaking teachers. Conclusion
This chapter has presented a brief overview of the literature on teacher identity and its relation to NESTs and NNESTs. The statement of the problem, the significance of the study, and the research question have also been presented. In the second chapter, the relevant literature is reviewed in more detail. In the third chapter, the methodology of the study is described. In the fourth chapter, the results of the study are presented, and in the last chapter, conclusions are drawn from the data in light of the literature.
CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW Introduction
The relevance of identity to language learning and teaching has been the focus of many studies (e.g., Chen, 2010; Duru, 2006; Huang, 2014; Izadinia, 2013; Norton, 2013). Discovering the importance of teacher identity in teaching and learning processes has led researchers to explore the concept in detail. As teacher identity is a complex concept consisting of several other sub-identities, researchers have put forth many theories to describe its components and the factors affecting it. One factor which has been a topic of interest to many researchers is the native-nonnative speaker dichotomy. A plethora of studies have been conducted to make sense of the effect of being a native or a nonnative speaker on teacher’s identity. However, these studies have looked at the identity construction from NESTs’ or NNESTs’ perspectives and overlooked the cases in which NESTs and NNESTs shift their roles.
This chapter provides an overview of the literature on identity, teacher identity, discussing its various components, factors influencing it, the native-nonnative dichotomy, and the effect of teacher status as a NEST or a NNEST on teacher identity.
Identity
Identity has been defined differently depending on the perspective it is viewed from. In order to reach a complete understanding of the concept, it is
necessary to explore identity from different angles. Humanistic perspectives assume that each individual has “an essential, unique, fixed and coherent core” (Norton, 2013, p. 4). From a poststructuralist point of view, however, identity is “diverse,
contradictory, dynamic and changing over historical time and social space” (Norton, 2013, p. 4). Similar to what Norton (2013) suggests, Block (2007) notes that
poststructuralists go beyond structuralism and search “nuanced, multi- leveled, and, ultimately, complicated framings of the world around us” rather than fixed and unchanging aspects (p. 864).
Based upon the poststructuralist perspective, Norton (2013) defines identity as “the way a person understands his or her relationship to the world, how that relationship is constructed across time and space, and how the person understands possibilities for the future” (p. 4). She further explains this definition by touching upon the fact that individuals negotiate and shift their identities during their
interactions in different contexts. Burke and Stets (2009) put it in a different way and describe identity as the characteristics that define who a person is and that make the individual unique when he or she occupies a certain role within a group or society. These definitions imply that people have multiple identities that are influenced and shaped by their relationships within particular situations or contexts.
Teacher Identity
The attempt to understand classroom practices better and the realization of teachers’ role in language teaching and learning processes have encouraged
researchers to explore the concept of teacher identity in recent years (Varghese et al., 2005). Duru (2006) highlights the necessity of examining teacher identity to gain an impression of traditional teaching and “to create, and reconstruct the possibilities for the new educational reforms, programs, paradigms, and change educational
processes for a better life” (p. 121). Apart from understanding the rationale behind teachers’ actions in class, understanding teacher identity is a way to look into teachers’ “career decision making, motivation, job satisfaction, emotion, and
commitment” (Hong, 2010, p. 1532). The last contribution of investigating teachers’ identity formation is the access to teachers’ inner worlds in which they deal with
many challenges from personal conflicts to more professional problems (Beijaard et al., 2004).
Defining Teacher Identity
The concept of teacher identity has attracted a great deal of interest in the literature, which has led to several complementing or conflicting definitions.
According to Beijaard et al. (2000), teachers construct their identities from “the ways they see themselves as subject matter experts, pedagogical experts, and didactical experts” (p. 751). Their study confirms that teachers perceive their professional identity by considering their knowledge of the subject matter they teach, their ability to communicate with students, and the training they have in order to prepare and execute lessons (Beijaard et al., 2000).
In a more recent study, Day, Kington, Stobart and Sammons (2006) provide an overview of the changing attitudes in the literature towards the concept of teacher identity. According to this overview, initial views which perceived teacher identity as a fixed and singular concept unaffected by the context have evolved into different notions (Day et al., 2006). Although Beijaard et al. (2004) point out the absence of a clear-cut definition of the concept, many researchers have come to an agreement on some key features. A widely accepted feature attributed to the concept is its dynamic nature (e.g., Beauchamp & Thomas, 2009; Beijaard et al., 2004; Duru, 2006; Gur, 2013; Rodgers & Scott, 2008; Tang, 1997). Another feature researchers mention is that teacher identity involves sub-identities that constantly change in accordance with different contexts and relationships (e.g., Akkerman and Meijer, 2011; Beijaard et al., 2004). What these two features mean is that teacher identity constantly changes throughout teachers’ career due to several factors. On the other hand, based on a review of the literature on teacher identity, Akkerman and Meijer (2011) take a more balanced stance and redefine teacher identity as “simultaneously unitary and
multiple, continuous and discontinuous, and individual and social” (p. 315). By combining contradictory characteristics, this stance shows how complex the concept of teacher identity is.
Despite the attempts to define teacher identity more explicitly on the basis of common themes recurring in the literature, the concept of teacher identity remains blurry due to different conceptualizations. Therefore, a further elaboration regarding the components constituting teacher identity and factors leading to changes in the identity is necessary to better explain the concept.
Components of Teacher Identity
Existing studies on teacher identity have opened the way to gain better insights into the essential components of the concept. Kelchtermans’ (1993) research lists self-image, self-esteem, job-motivation, task perception and future perspective as the indicators of professional identity; however, he also notes how interwoven these concepts are. Some other components of teacher identity acknowledged by the researchers are self-efficacy (Bandura, 1995; Gibbs, 2003), beliefs about teaching and learning (Williams & Burden, 1997), knowledge (Beijaard et al., 2004), beliefs, values, motivation, job satisfaction, commitment (Day et al., 2006), and emotions (Beauchamp & Thomas, 2009; Day et al., 2006).
Looking at previous studies, Beijaard et al. (2004) argue that different concepts regarding teacher identity actually refer to the same thing, noting the need to provide “better conceptual clarity” as to how these concepts are related to each other (p. 126). In fact, a careful look at the suggested components of teacher identity in the literature reveals a set of interrelated terms. The main question, therefore, is to delve into the core of teacher identity and identify the key components affecting all the others. In this regard, when the external factors are eliminated, self-esteem, motivation, occupational commitment and job satisfaction seem more like the results
of having a positive perception of the self and abilities. If teachers have weak images of the self and doubt their abilities, this will affect their self-esteem and motivation to teach, leading to negative emotions and lack of job satisfaction. In contrast, positive perceptions of the self as teachers and trust in their abilities to teach will increase teachers’ self-confidence, motivate them, affect the classroom performance and give them a sense of satisfaction. Apart from these, teachers’ beliefs about teaching and learning can be regarded as a major component of teacher identity as these beliefs shape their choice of actions and judgments in class. Overall, image, self-efficacy and beliefs about teaching and learning are three crucial components of teacher identity influencing all the others.
Self-image
According to Knowles (1992), teacher identity is “the way in which individuals think about themselves as teachers—the images they have of self-as-teacher” (p. 99). This definition introduces self-image as one of the components of identity. Self-image can simply be defined as “the particular view that we have of ourselves” (Williams & Burden, 1997, p. 97).
Referring to self-image as one of the indicators of teacher identity,
Kelchtermans (1993) defines the term as teachers’ self-description of themselves and their views of how they are perceived by other people. This point of view brings forward a different stance towards self-image because it refers to teachers’
understanding of how others perceive them as well as their own perceptions of the self. In other words, teachers negotiate their self-image through their own views of themselves and the images that they believe others ascribe to them. Furthermore, as Day et al. (2006) claim, teachers build their identities in the light of their beliefs about what kind of teacher they wish to be. These beliefs can also be linked to the
concept of self-image since teachers need to reflect on their own views of themselves in order to determine the characteristics of the ideal teacher they want to be.
Regarding the importance of self-image, Knowles (1992) draws conclusions based on five separate case studies of pre-service secondary teachers. Due to several factors, the teachers in his study had either strong or weak image of themselves as teachers, and this led to failure or success of these teachers in class. Parallel to this study, Beijaard et al. (2000) argue that teachers’ views of themselves might influence their efficacy, teaching practices and motivation to teach as well as their willingness to develop professionally. This claim not only signals the importance of self-image, but it also shows how the components of teacher identity are related to each other.
In the field of teaching, Deghaidy (2006) carried out a study to investigate pre-service teachers’ images of the self and self-efficacy beliefs as science teachers. The study was conducted on 36 pre-service science teachers enrolled in a 4-year undergraduate teacher educational program in Egypt. The results showed that after taking methods course, the participants’ images of the self and efficacy beliefs changed, and this change resulted in increased self-confidence and a more effective teaching. Another finding of the study was that the teachers’ approach to teaching shifted from a teacher-centered to a student-centered approach. This study also shows how self-image, self-efficacy and teachers’ beliefs about teaching are interconnected. Despite the importance of self-image as a part of teacher identity, there are no studies examining language teachers’ views of themselves.
Self-efficacy
According to Williams and Burden (1997), self-efficacy is “our beliefs about our capabilities in certain areas or related to certain tasks” (p. 97). One of the primary sources of information on self-efficacy is Bandura (1995). He defines the term as “beliefs in one's capabilities to organize and execute the courses of action required to
manage prospective situations” (p. 2). He provides a detailed analysis of how self-efficacy affects individuals’ thoughts, feelings, motivation and performances, and proposes factors affecting efficacy. His analysis shows that success is closely tied to a strong sense of self-efficacy, and the sense of self-efficacy can be developed by observing people who can handle similar experiences successfully and being
encouraged by them. According to Bandura (1995), teachers who trust their abilities have higher motivation to promote learning in class. In contrast, if people have doubts about their capabilities, they experience more stress and tension and give up more easily under difficult conditions. Therefore, teachers who doubt their abilities may have lower levels of motivation and occupational commitment, experience emotional problems, and even end up with teacher burnout (Bandura, 1995).
Drawing attention to the limited number of studies on NNESTs’ self-efficacy, Eslami and Fatahi (2008) examined forty high-school EFL teachers in Iran to explore their self-efficacy for interactive engagement, classroom management and
instructional strategies. The study also looked at these teachers’ self-reported English proficiency levels and pedagogical strategies. The ultimate aim was to investigate the correlations among teachers’ sense of efficacy, their proficiency and pedagogical strategies. Overall, the findings revealed a positive relationship between perceived level of language proficiency and sense of self-efficacy. Moreover, the teachers’ sense of self-efficacy affected the use of communicative-based strategies in class. In other words, those who perceived themselves proficient in English had a higher sense of efficacy for interactive engagement, classroom management and instructional strategies, and high self-efficacy beliefs affected the pedagogical strategies used in class.
In short, teachers’ beliefs in their capabilities affect their behaviors and choices in their professional lives as they engage in tasks they think they can perform
successfully and avoid the ones that they feel they are incapable of. These beliefs might discourage teachers from making an attempt to improve themselves and their performances in class. As Gibbs (2003) put it, due to their impact on teachers’ thoughts and emotions as well as the effectiveness of classroom practices, teachers’ beliefs about their capabilities are regarded as essential part of teacher identity.
The difference between self-image and self-efficacy is explained by
Zimmerman (1995) who suggests that self-efficacy is related to people’s “judgments of [their] capabilities to perform activities … not who they are as people or how they feel about themselves in general” (p. 203). Although self-image and self-efficacy might seem to be overlapping, self-image is more related to how individuals describe themselves and their views of how others describe them. Self-efficacy, on the other hand, is people’s perceptions of their abilities. More specifically, when teachers describe themselves as approachable, friendly and enthusiastic, they reflect on their self-images. Teachers’ beliefs about their classroom management skills, instructional strategies and proficiency levels are more related to their capabilities as teachers, and thus are reflections of their efficacies. Nevertheless, it can be noted that self-image, self-efficacy, and the other components of teacher identity are interrelated and affect each other as suggested in the literature (e.g., Bandura, 1995; Beijaard et al., 2000; Kelchtermans, 1993).
Beliefs about Teaching and Learning
In addition to teachers’ beliefs about themselves, another crucial element of teacher identity stressed by Williams and Burden (1997) is their beliefs about
teaching and learning. Teachers’ approach to the way a language is learned, choice of activities, relationship with students, decisions about techniques for error correction and many other aspects can be considered as part of teachers’ beliefs about teaching and learning. Teachers determine the organization of their lessons, plan their lessons,
and react to the problems in class based on these beliefs. Therefore, it can be concluded that teachers’ beliefs about teaching and learning affect all their actions and their performance in class as Williams and Burden (1997) suggest.
Arguing that teachers’ beliefs about learning and teaching are an important part of teacher knowledge and the basis for their actions in class, S. Kim (2011) explored eight native English speaking teachers teaching at a four year university in Korea to find out their beliefs about learning, teaching and teacher roles. The findings of the study confirm that the teachers’ beliefs about learning, such as learners’ participation, error correction, and autonomy, derive from their personal and professional experiences in the past and that they have an impact on their classroom practices. As a concluding remark, the researcher encourages the teachers to be aware of their own beliefs to improve their teaching practices.
A different study conducted by Bukor (2012) reaffirms the importance of teacher beliefs. The study investigates the transformation of four language teachers’ perspectives of their teacher identity through a reflective autobiographical process. By drawing conclusions based on the analysis of the participants’ experiences, the researcher concludes that teacher beliefs constitute an essential part of their identities as they affect teacher behaviors in class and they shape the teachers’ perceptions and interpretations of themselves.
Factors Influencing Teacher Identity
In addition to defining teacher identity and the components constituting it, factors shaping teacher identity need to be explored in order to gain a better understanding of the concept. One of the earlier attempts to delve into factors
affecting teacher identity was made by Knowles (1992). Five separate case studies on pre-service secondary teachers conducted by him indicate that university education or teacher education programs do not have a big influence on the formation of
teacher identity as they are not sensitive to individual needs or previous experiences. Instead, childhood and family experiences, experiences as learners, teaching
experiences and significant people in their lives seem to affect teachers’ beliefs about teaching and their teaching performance in the classroom (Knowles, 1992). Some other researchers, however, disagree with Knowles (1992) and highlight the impact of teacher education experience on teacher identity construction (e.g., Duru, 2006; Olsen, 2008; Varghese et al., 2005).
Looking at the concept of teacher identity from a different perspective, Varghese et al. (2005) claim that teacher identity is an “individual and psychological matter” since it is related to teachers’ self-perceptions (p. 39). Nevertheless, they also point out that teacher identity is “a social matter” as teachers form, negotiate and reconstruct their identities in social contexts like schools (Varghese et al., 2005, p. 39). What these views suggest is that teacher identity is constructed under the influence of individuals’ own processing and social relations. Similar to the social aspect of teacher identity construction pointed out by Varghese et al. (2005), Beauchamp and Thomas (2009) mention teachers’ current school environment, the learner profile, their colleagues and school administrators as influences on identity. Different from these factors, Olsen (2008) directs attention to career plans of teachers while Duru (2006) points out popular culture and workplace conditions.
All these factors might not only shape and reshape teacher identity but also lead to identity shifts throughout teachers’ careers “as a result of interactions within schools and in broader communities” (Beauchamp & Thomas, 2009, p. 175). In line with this view, Rodgers and Scott (2008) also discuss how identity is reconstructed in different contexts and in relationship with other people. They also note how novice teachers undergo identity shifts through teacher education programs and classroom experience while trying to discover how they should teach. It is inevitable
that these identity shifts will lead teachers to improve themselves as teachers; however, they might also lead to lack of confidence, frustration and poor performance.
Pavlenko (2003) confirmed that identity shifts might lead teachers to face some challenges. In her study, she investigated the relationship between the imagined communities and perceived status of 44 pre-service and in-service ESL/EFL teachers in a Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL) program. The participants in the study had been teaching English in their native country before coming to the U.S. The study revealed that some of the participants felt less competent and confident after coming to the U.S., as their identity shifted from a teacher to a student. Looking at the participants’ stories, the researcher concluded that these teachers’ positioning themselves as native or nonnative speakers affected their perceptions of their competence, self-esteem, and thus identities (Pavlenko, 2003). This study puts forward the necessity of discussing a different factor affecting teacher identity, which is the native-nonnative dichotomy.
The Native-Nonnative Dichotomy Definition of Native-Nonnative Speakers
There are several definitions of a native and a nonnative speaker in the literature (e.g., Braine, 2010; Davies, 2003; Medgyes, 2001). Medgyes (2001) defines a native speaker of English as “someone who speaks English as his or her native language, also called mother tongue, first language, or L1” (p. 430). Similarly, exposure to a language from birth is the key characteristic that Murray and Christison (2011) use to identify a native speaker. From a different perspective, Davies (2003) regards native speakers as models to refer to in order to check the accuracy and acceptability of utterances since they have “a special control over a language, insider knowledge about their language” (p. 1). Considering these definitions, a nonnative
speaker can be defined as a person who speaks a language not as his or her first language, but as a second or a foreign language (Braine, 2010).
Cook (2005) brings a critical view to referring to the first learned language in childhood to identify a native speaker. He notes that such a definition means that nobody can be a native speaker of a language learned after childhood unless they go back in time and learn the target language in their childhood. To solve the problem of defining NNESTs and NESTs in terms of the other and comparing the terms to figure out what they are and what they are not, he coins the concept of L2 user. He suggests that this concept implies the fact that teachers should help their students become effective L2 users, not imitate native speakers.
Differences between Native and Nonnative Teachers
The differences between native and nonnative language teachers have
attracted a great deal of attention in the literature (e.g., Canagarajah, 1999; Medgyes, 1992; Phillipson, 1992; Tang, 1997). A popular term in the discussion of native versus nonnative teachers is “native speaker fallacy” which was coined by Phillipson (1992) to reflect the belief that “the ideal teacher is a native speaker, somebody with native speaker proficiency in English who can serve as a model for the pupils” (p.193).
As a response to this fallacy, Medgyes (1992) provides a detailed analysis of native and nonnative speakers. According to Medgyes (1992), when a person is exposed to English at birth and during childhood in an English-speaking
environment, that person is thought to be a more proficient speaker of English compared to a person who is not from an English-speaking environment. He backs up the view that native speakers have an advantage over nonnative speakers which cannot be compensated for by “… motivation, aptitude, perseverance, experience, education, or anything else” (p. 342). As a further explanation, he claims that no
matter what they do, nonnative speakers can never reach a native-like language competence (Medgyes, 1992). Nevertheless, Medgyes (1992) also questions whether proficiency in English can guarantee being an ideal teacher and concludes that NESTs and NNESTs have their own merits and both can be effective in class. Thanks to their experiences as language learners themselves, NNESTs can be good language models for learners, share their strategies with them, anticipate the possible problems, and make use of their mother tongue if necessary. Medgyes (1992) ends the discussion by putting forward that being an ideal teacher requires NESTs to achieve “a high degree of proficiency in the learners’ mother tongue” and NNESTs to reach “near-native proficiency in English” (pp. 348-349).
Based on her survey, Tang (1997) also discusses the roles of NNESTs in class. Between 1995 and 1996, she conducted a study which included 47 NNESTs in a teacher retraining course in Hong Kong. In her study, she asked the participants questions about their perceptions of the proficiency and competency of NESTs and NNESTs. The results indicated that NESTs were believed to be more competent compared to NNESTs in “speaking (100%), pronunciation (92%), listening (87%), vocabulary (79%), and reading (72%)” while NNESTs were associated with accurate use of language (Tang, 1997, pp. 577-578). Some of the participants considered NNESTs to have certain advantages, in that they could relate to students’ learning problems more easily due to their own L2 learning experiences. Considering the findings of her study, Tang (1997) emphasizes the importance of the pedagogical role that NNESTs take on in class.
More recently, Canagarajah (1999) has contributed to this debate and re-evaluated the distinction between native and nonnative speakers in the context of language teaching and learning. He questions if being a native speaker or having a good pronunciation and accent necessarily means being a good teacher. Although he
admits that NESTs and NNESTs might have their own merits in teaching language for different purposes, he also claims that even teachers who are not competent in English might function as good teachers based on his own experiences as a learner. As a concluding remark, he draws attention to the effect of this notion on
employment prospects and underlines the necessity of overcoming the obsession to be native-like and developing a more accurate sense of professionalism.
The Effect of Being a Native or Nonnative Teacher on Teachers’ Identity Despite the changing attitudes towards NNESTs along with several studies showing that native teachers are not necessarily better than nonnative teachers or being a native teacher does not guarantee being an effective teacher, the comparison of NNESTs to NESTs by their students, trainers or administrators remains an issue. Amin (1997) draws attention to the challenge that NNESTs need to confront. The researcher notes that even qualified teachers might be less effective and have difficulty constructing their identity if their students perceive them as incapable teachers because they are NNESTs. Similarly, Huang (2014) claims that NNESTs’ language competence is often considered as “deviating from the native norm” especially in terms of accent, which affects “their credibility as English language teachers” (p. 120). As Juhász (2011) puts it very well, NNESTs feel under the pressure of being asked a question which they may not be able to answer. When NESTs come across such a situation, they can deal with it more easily as their knowledge is not questioned by the students (Juhász, 2011). A more serious problem is teachers’ self perceptions of their merits or deficiencies as NNESTs. Such self-categorizations or prejudices might affect NNESTs’ “teacher persona, self-esteem, and thus their in-class performance” (Selvi, 2011, p. 187). In this respect, being a NEST or NNEST is a crucial factor influencing teachers’ identity construction.
Numerous studies have focused on NNESTs’ identity constructions (e.g., H. Kim, 2011; Inbar-Lourie, 2005; Johnson, 2001; Ortaçtepe, 2015; Park, 2012) while fewer studies have looked at the issue from NESTs’ perspective (e.g., Inbar-Lourie, 2005; Juhász, 2011; Wong, 2009). Johnson (2001) explored teacher identity of a nonnative English speaking graduate student studying at a 2-year MA TESOL program in the U.S. Marc, who was a Mexican woman in her late twenties, tried to balance her multiple identities as a language learner and teacher during her
experience in the U.S. Looking at Marc’s experiences, Johnson (2001) claimed that while constructing their identities as ESL teachers, MA TESOL students take on the role of a nonnative English speaking teacher and become a part of that social group. While NESTs do not have to be concerned about the native part of their identity, NNESTs’ self-identifications as NNESTs make them question their competence as nonnative speakers and teachers. In this sense, Johnson (2001) concluded that Marc’s experiences indicate how self perceptions and social identification of teachers
influence teacher identity.
A different study carried out by H. Kim (2011) explored three nonnative English speaking graduate students’ identity reconstruction as pre-service EFL teachers during their experiences in a U.S. English teacher education program. Data were collected through a questionnaire and individual interviews, and were analyzed thematically. The study suggested that NNESTs’ lack of confidence in their English competence and view of native speakers as ideal teachers affected their self-esteem and self-images. However, their experiences in the U.S. reshaped these teachers’ images, reconstructed the way they positioned themselves, and built their self-confidence (H. Kim, 2011).
According to Park (2012), there has been little attention to the experiences of NNESTs who come to the U.S. as part of teaching English to speakers of other
languages (TESOL) programs. Arguing that these teachers’ journeys might illuminate the identity reconstruction of NNESTs who come from different backgrounds to the U.S. contexts, she presented the experiences of one Chinese student, Xia Wang, before and during her TESOL program in the U.S. In light of the findings, Park (2012) concluded that comparing her identity back in China with her current state and questioning her accomplishments and status as an English speaker, Xia Wang underwent a transformation from a state of “powerlessness and confusion about her identity” (p. 137) to “acceptance of her NNEST identity in the United States” (p. 141). She also highlighted the importance of this study in that it might “enable the members of TESOL programs to see the inner worlds of NNESTs and can lead to (re)shaping the contents of the TESOL curricula” (Park, 2012, p. 142).
In her study, Ortaçtepe (2015) examined the language socialization experiences of two experienced Turkish EFL teachers pursuing their graduate degrees in the U.S. to shed light on their identity reconstruction as teachers of intercultural competence. The data were collected through autobiographical narratives, journal entries and interviews, and they were analyzed according to Boyatzis’ (1998) thematic analysis and Norton’s (2000) notion of investment. The findings revealed that the participants’ language socialization experiences differed in regards to the varying social contexts they were involved in. Moreover, their
experiences gave these teachers the opportunity to reflect on their own teaching, English language teaching in Turkey and their lives in the U.S., which was a sign of identity investment (Ortaçtepe, 2015).
Compared to NNESTs, the number of studies on NESTs’ identities is somewhat limited. Looking at the native and nonnative dichotomy from both perspectives, Inbar-Lourie (2005) delved into the gap between self and perceived identities of teachers. According to the researcher, both NESTs and NNESTs might
experience an identity conflict when their own perceptions of their identities contradict others’ opinions of them as native or nonnative speakers. She identified variables affecting this gap as being familiar with the target language and its culture, racial issues, pronunciation, and beliefs in one’s capabilities to teach the subject. With the purpose of finding out more about the relationship between teachers’ self and perceived identities as NESTs and NNESTs, she conducted a study on 102 mostly female EFL teachers with an average of 12 years of teaching experience born in different countries and teaching in Israel. These teachers were asked to report on their perceptions of themselves as NESTs or NNESTs. They were also asked about how others perceived them. The findings confirmed the existence of a gap between nonnative self and perceived identities. For teachers who ascribed themselves as NESTs, however, this gap was less noticeable (Inbar-Lourie, 2005).
From a different perspective, Wong (2009) focused on three aspects of untrained native English speaking tutors: their language lessons, the challenges they faced while teaching and their perceptions of their own teaching. The study included eight NESTs who had no prior language teaching experience and no former language teaching training. The findings suggested that while some of the teachers were very creative during the lessons, they did not seem to have a clear purpose for teaching language. They also had difficulty explaining the language to the students. The study is significant as it revealed the necessity for proper training for teachers to teach their native language (Wong, 2009).
Claiming that relatively little attention has been paid to NESTs, Juhász (2011) explored 18 native English speaking teachers’ experiences in a foreign language classroom to uncover the difficulties they experienced, their perceptions of their own strengths and weaknesses, and their perceptions of the differences between NESTs and NNESTs. For this purpose, she carried out a qualitative research project and
collected data from 18 NESTs working in different institutions in Budapest, Hungary through a questionnaire survey and follow-up interviews. Most of the participants seemed to agree that NESTs were good models for students in terms of correct pronunciation and intonation, and appropriate use of idiomatic expressions.
However, they confirmed that NESTs might have problems in explaining grammar rules to students. Not knowing the students’ first language and culture were some of the challenges NESTs mentioned. Regarding the differences between NESTs and NNESTs, they stated that NESTs were more tolerant of errors and did error correction only when essential, while NNESTs paid more attention to correction, especially of grammatical errors. To overcome this problem, Juhász (2011) stressed the importance of a closer cooperation between NESTs and NNESTs.
As seen in the above mentioned studies, identity construction of NNESTs and NESTs has been investigated due to the importance of teacher identity in teaching and learning process. However, earlier studies have overlooked the cases in which teachers need to change their roles from NNESTs to NESTs because of either teacher exchange programs or study abroad opportunities.
Conclusion
This chapter has presented a review of literature on identity and teacher identity with its definitions and three prominent components constituting it. In an attempt to gain a better understanding of the concept, factors influencing teacher identity have also been analyzed. Among those factors, the native-nonnative dichotomy has been discussed in more detail. In this regard, definitions of and differences between NESTs and NNESTs have been provided. Then, studies
conducted on identity construction of NESTs and NNESTs have been presented. The overview of the studies has shown that many studies have looked at how NESTs and/or NNESTs negotiate and reshape their identities. However, the cases which
require NESTs and NNESTs to shift their roles and the effect of this change on teachers’ identity have not been analyzed. To this end, this case study aims to explore identity (re)construction of nonnative EFL teachers who go to the USA to teach their native language, Turkish, as native teachers.
The next chapter will present the methodology of the present study and cover the participants, instruments, data collection, and data analysis procedures. It will be followed by the presentation of the findings, and then, the findings will be discussed in the final chapter.
CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY Introduction
This case study explores the experiences of five Turkish EFL teachers who were in the USA to teach Turkish for one year. The aim of the study is to investigate how the shift from the role of a nonnative English teacher to a native Turkish teacher affects their identity (re)construction. In this respect, the study addresses the
following research question:
How does the changing role from a nonnative L2 teacher to a native L1 teacher affect Turkish EFL teachers’ identity (re)construction in terms of
1. self-image? 2. self-efficacy?
3. beliefs about teaching and learning?
This chapter consists of seven main sections, specifically the participants and settings, the research design, instruments, data collection procedures, data analysis, rigor and credibility of the qualitative measures, and the researcher. In the first section, the participants and settings of this study are introduced and described in detail. In the second section, the research design of the study is explained briefly. In the third section, three different data collection instruments, which are a
questionnaire, ongoing controlled journals, and interviews, are presented. In the fourth section, the steps followed in the research procedure including the selection of the participants and data collection are mentioned step by step. In the fifth section, the overall procedure for data analysis is provided. In the sixth section, rigor and credibility of the qualitative measures are discussed. In the final section, the researcher is described.
Participants and Settings
The participants of this study were five nonnative English speaking teachers who went to the USA for one year to teach Turkish through a prestigious scholarship. All the participants, three of whom were female and two of whom were male, were from Turkey and were between the ages of 27 to 29. Four of them had degrees in English Language Teaching (ELT) while one of them was a graduate of the Department of English Language and Literature. Moreover, two of them had completed their master’s degrees before this study was conducted, while the other two were still graduate students in different MA programs (in ELT and Management in Education) (see Table 1 for more details about the participants).
Before going to the USA, the participants worked at different universities in Turkey as English teachers, and their experiences ranged from four to seven years. All of them had experience in teaching preparatory classes, which are one-year compulsory programs in which undergraduate students study before taking coursework in their majors. In addition, two of the participants had experience in teaching English in different contexts. Specifically, one of the teachers prepared students for exams like Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL),
International English Language Testing System (IELTS) and Yabancı Dil Sınavı (YDS), a foreign language proficiency test administered in Turkey. Another participant taught English for nine months as an assistant teacher in primary, secondary and high schools in Austria through another scholarship. However, none of them had experience in teaching Turkish or a language other than English before going to the United States except for one participant who had helped a few blind students with their Turkish lessons when she was a university student (see Table 1 below for more detailed demographic information about the participants).
Table 1
Demographic Information about the Participants
Teacher # Ahmet Berna Gamze Merve Tamer
Gender Male Female Female Female Male
Age 27 29 27 27 29
Native Tongue
Turkish Turkish Turkish Turkish Turkish
BA English
Language Teaching (ELT)
ELT ELT ELT English
Language and Literature MA In progress in ELT None In progress in Management in Education In ELT In TEFL TOEFL or IELTS scores TOEFL 104/120 IELTS 8/9 TOEFL 98 TOEFL 95 TOEFL 106/120 IELTS 8,5/9 Years of experience in teaching 4 preparatory classes 7 preparatory classes & primary, secondary and high schools in Austria 5 preparatory classes 5.5 preparatory classes 5 preparatory classes &
for exams like TOEFL & IELTS Experience abroad As a student (5 months) & for travel As an assistant English teacher (9 months)
None Travel Travel
Experience in teaching Turkish
None None Helped a few
blind students
None None
Note: To preserve anonymity and confidentiality, the participants who participated in this research
study are identified by pseudonyms throughout the study.
The participants went to the USA in mid-August 2014 to teach Turkish and they were scheduled to go back to Turkey in May 2015. The advantage of this
scholarship was that the participants had official permission from the institutions they worked at and thus, they would continue working there when they went back to Turkey. This study explored their experiences in the USA from September 2014 to the end of February 2015. As for their settings during this study, the participants taught at different universities and lived in different parts of the USA. Therefore, the levels they taught, the number of students and classes they had, and the places they lived in differed from each other. While one of them had only one class in the first semester, the others had two or three classes. The levels of these classes varied from beginner, elementary, pre-intermediate, intermediate to advanced. The number of students they had ranged from three to nine students, which were quite different from the classes they taught back in Turkey. Another difference was their class hours. While one participant had to teach only four hours a week, the others had six or eight hours. Besides these teaching hours, they had office hours with students and
organized some kind of conversation clubs or Turkish movie days for their students. Despite these extra hours, the participants all agreed that these teaching hours were a lot fewer compared to the ones they had in Turkey. In addition to their teaching duties, they also took classes as students as part of the program through which they went to the USA.
As for their daily lives, they lived in dormitory-like houses or apartments with two or three bedrooms, which means they had a room to their own and shared the apartment with two or three people and even nine people depending on the type of housing. Lastly, they had the chance to be in contact with people from different countries and their cultures as well as American people and culture. They also travelled during their free times and especially during their holiday in December, which gave them the opportunity to see different places, interact with more people, get to know different cultures, and broaden their horizons.
